Saturday, October 2, 2010

If you don't cut your carbon emissions by 10%, the followers of Saint Albert, The Goracle Of Music City, are going to splatter your guts all over the office.
There's going to be nothing left of you but a greasy spot.

That's the message of this video, and it is not a parody. It's a fantasy.
What you're about to see was produced by a group called 10:10, who want everyone to reduce their carbon emissions by 10%. Or else.
There's a link at the bottom of this post where you can read 10:10's apology to the environmental movement for pulling back the curtain too far. Hell, we've now seen behind the curtain, the man behind the curtain, his underwear, his hernia scar, and that tattoo he got during that wild trip to New Orleans.
Goodgodalmighty, they should also apologize to their mothers, their children, and everyone who knows them.

Don't they know that in the last century, governments killed 200 million of their own citizens?

What makes this fascinating is that the people who produce this dreck have no clue as to just how far removed they have become from normal human sensibilities, or at least they didn’t until the video began provoking the fully-predictable reaction. They have become so wrapped up in Gaia that they seem to have little connection to humanity.

(Go here if you want to learn more about the mindset of the lady with the sign. It's a subject for another day.)

The most alarming part of the video? To me it is when the office workers slowly start raising their hands, looking around to see if everyone else is raising theirs. They look like they don't agree with what is being asked of them, but they are afraid to express anything except mindless conformity.

Otherwise, you see, the nice man might hit his red button. Get in line, you mindless sheep. Start goose-stepping. You see, there's No Pressure.

Ok, enough ranting. Here's the video.

Hope everyone has a great Saturday. I'm going to dispatch 6 semi-tractor drivers and have them ride around Fort Worth all day, just for the hell of it.
I'm turning on every light in the damn house.
The contents of my city-mandated recycling bin are going into the regular garbage.
I'm breaking every CFL ObamaBulb I can find, and dumping the mercury into the sewers.
In a few minutes, people in Abbot, Texas, will be able to hear Lynyrd Skynyrd's One More From The Road blasting forth from my stereo, Limey Nanny-Staters with red buttons be damned.

Go here to read an apology from the producers of this mess. Go here to see Audi's "Green Police" ad, just in case you've forgotten about it. You see, this was not a fluke. The authoritarians among us really do believe that this imagery is appealing.

Friday, October 1, 2010

Due to some long-forgotten gerrymandering, my house sits in the southern panhandle of Texas Congressional District #26.
Come November, this accident of geography gives me the privilege of voting for Mark Boler, the Libertarian candidate for Congress.

Here's why I think Mark Boler would be great....Go here to check out his responses to the Dallas Morning News Voter Guide survey.

You can also go here to his campaign website, but Mr. Boler's Facebook page has a much more concise summary of his beliefs and principles:

I am a Libertarian. I am outspoken. I believe in extremely limited government and maximum personal and individual freedom. And I believe the United States of late is moving in the opposite direction and is in need of REAL change.

I believe that government is best that governs least. The role of the government is to protect INDIVIDUAL rights and DEFEND the country from attack. I believe in free trade and no entangling alliances.

I firmly believe in the non-aggression principle of the Libertarian Party. I believe in cutting taxes, bringing all of our troops back home and ending the Federal Reserve system.

Because I believe in a strong DEFENSE, however, I do not believe the US should dismantle all nuclear weapons. Other countries will acquire them in the future no matter how hard we try not to let them.

I am running for US Congress, Texas' 26th District. The platform I believe in that will restore this country to greatness includes these tenets:

* Dramatically reduce the size and scope of government.

* Shut Down the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

* Abolish the Federal Reserve System and return to a policy of sound money.

* Repeal the Patriot Act and other legislation that violates 4th amendment rights.

* Return the United States to a foreign policy of non-intervention. Note: This does NOT mean isolationism.

* End the war on drugs and get rid of drug prohibition

* Withdraw the United States from the United Nations and other one-world organizations.

* Remove "big government" Republicans and Democrats from office.

* Phase out Social Security, Medicare, Welfare, Food Stamps, WIC, and other communist programs and eventually replace them with free market, insurance and charity based systems.

* Restore individual sovereignty and reduce the role of government in our lives.

* Restore the rule of law and criminally prosecute politicians, corporations and other individuals who violate the law.

* Allow American citizens to spend their own money, own their own property, raise their own children, practice their own religion, be secure in their persons, be free from government harrassment and regulation, own and carry deadly weapons for protection, travel and do business from state to state unmolested, and speak and think freely without danger of imprisonment.

Does this sound extreme? Heck yes, it sounds extreme.
Now, tell me if this sounds extreme....Your government has you on the hook for $50,000.00 in debt. If you, like me, have a family of three people, you are $150,000.00 in debt.
There's also your share of the unfunded liabilities are somewhere north of $350,000.00. (More than a million dollars if you're in a household of three.)
Once all the teachers, soldiers, policemen, jailers, parole officers, congressmen, bureaucrats, and African Genital Washers start retiring, they're going to want your money. And they're going to get it. We're doomed. The piper is going to have to be paid.

However, there is some hope for our grandchildren. We can start electing Libertarians who pledge to shut down entire departments within our government, get us out of the Korean/German/Japanese defense business, get us out of the bailout industry, and force us to spend only about 75% of what we take in while we whittle down the debt.

Congressman Michael Burgess (R-Monsanto) is probably a great guy, but he will no more shut down the Department Of Energy than shut down the orbit of Venus. Republicans just aren't the shutdown types.

Extreme? Maybe so. But say your family is one million dollars in debt, and if you're an average American earner with a family of three, your family really is going to have to come up with a million bucks to fund this disaster.

Can you think of a way out that's "moderate"?

Back to Mark Boler's Facebook page:

"The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing" ~ Albert Einstein

Guns are deeply rooted within Swiss culture - but the gun crime rate is so low that statistics are not even kept.

The country has a population of six million, but there are estimated to be at least two million publicly-owned firearms, including about 600,000 automatic rifles and 500,000 pistols.
This is in a very large part due to Switzerland's unique system of national defence, developed over the centuries.
Instead of a standing, full-time army, the country requires every man to undergo some form of military training for a few days or weeks a year throughout most of their lives.
Between the ages of 21 and 32 men serve as frontline troops. They are given an M-57 assault rifle and 24 rounds of ammunition which they are required to keep at home.
Once discharged, men serve in the Swiss equivalent of the US National Guard, but still have to train occasionally and are given bolt rifles. Women do not have to own firearms, but are encouraged to.

The nation (Switzerland) is ready to mobilise on a moment's notice. Said one Swiss citizen-soldier, "If we start in the morning, we would be mobilised by late afternoon. That is why the gun is at home, the ammunition is at home. The younger people all have automatic rifles. They are ready to fight."

From Wikipedia (granted, not a reliable source, but I can't read the linked references in German.)

Police statistics for the year 2006 records 34 killings or attempted killings involving firearms, compared to 69 cases involving bladed weapons and 16 cases of unarmed assault. Cases of assault resulting in bodily harm numbered 89 (firearms) and 526 (bladed weapons). As of 2007, Switzerland had a population of about 7,600,000. This would put the rate of killings or attempted killings with firearms at about one for every quarter million residents yearly. This represents a decline of aggravated assaults involving firearms since the early 1990s. Some 300 deaths per year are due to legally held army ordnance weapons, the large majority of these being suicides.

Remember, Switzerland has a population of 6 million. And that's 34 killings or attempts that weren't necessarily succesful. Now, let's bring it all back home. Here's the Washington Times:

If Chicago were serious about bringing its violent crime problem under control, it would recognize the constitutional right of residents to use firearms to protect themselves.

Chicago's population is around 2.8 million, for purposes of comparison to Switzerland's 6 million.

The city's troubles are so extreme that a pair of state lawmakers are calling on a fellow Democrat, Gov. Pat Quinn, to deploy the National Guard to help restore calm. The latest figures show that Chicago had racked up 122 homicides for the year, exceeding the 116 killings over the comparable period in 2009, a very bad year. Among the top 10 U.S. cities, Chicago is within shooting distance of advancing from second place to win the dubious distinction of being the U.S. murder capital. It's no coincidence that the Windy City is already the U.S. gun-control capital.

Since 1982, Chicago has banned the private ownership of handguns and rifles by requiring a convoluted registration process designed to be impossible to complete. Exceptions to the rules enable politicians and their personal friends to own and even carry handguns - but nobody else. This unconstitutional scheme has been a colossal failure. Before the ban took effect, Chicago's murder rate had been falling relative to the nine other largest cities, the 50 largest cities, the five counties that border Cook County, and the United States as a whole. After the ban, Chicago's murder rate rose relative to all these locations. During the first 19 years of the ban, there were just three years when the murder rate was as low as when the ban started.

Here's some video. Be sure to catch the part where the government actually supplies ammo for recreational target practice and shooting events.

Best quote in the video: "The key to freedom is the ability to be able to defend yourself, and if you don't have the tools to do that, you are at the mercy of whoever wants to put you away."

A wind farm in Missouri that got a $107 million stimulus grant is generating some turbulence for two prominent Democratic candidates, Robin Carnahan, the state’s Democratic Senate candidate and her brother, Rep. Russ Carnahan.

The wind farm is a project of Wind Capital Group of St. Louis, whose president, CEO and founder is the Carnahans’ brother, Tom Carnahan.

....An Energy Department spokeswoman said the grants in lieu of tax credits had been awarded to all eligible applicants, and that the department had reviewed Wind Capital Group’s application in the same way it had reviewed all the others.

Yeah. She looked at who was pushing for the grant, and said "yea" or "nay" based on the Congressman's clout. Carnahan has clout.

Look, these things have absolutely nothing to do with usefulness, the public good, the general welfare, or common sense. They are about recruiting and rewarding donors. If the Carnahans could loot the public till by claiming that wind farms prevent alien invasions from the planet Nekthar, that's the justification they would use.

Please be patient with me. I'm going somewhere with this.....

This next excerpt is from The Cato Institute, where they are working up some outrage over The Teleprompter Jesus wanting to hire 10,000 more teachers.

This week, President Obama called for the hiring of 10,000 new teachers to beef up math and science achievement. Meanwhile....public school employment has grown 10 times faster than enrollment for 40 years (see chart), while achievement at the end of high school has stagnated in math and declined in science (hit the link to see the other chart).

Either the president is badly misinformed about our education system or he thinks that promising to hire another 10,000 teachers union members is politically advantageous–in which case he would seem to be badly misinformed about the present political climate. Or he lives in an alternate universe in which Kirk and Spock have facial hair and government monopolies are efficient. It’s hard to say.

So what? Russ Carnahan gave his brother's Superstition-Based Energy Company a total of $102 million dollars, despite prayer, wind, and wishful thinking all being less efficient than oil.

Barack Obama wants to add 10,000 more public school teachers to the public tit, despite the dismal results shown above.

So when are we going to stop believing that their stated goals have anything to do with these wealth transfers? It is all about rewarding supporters, folks.

Wake the hell up !

On every survey or poll taken, you claim that you don't trust Congress, you don't approve of Congress, and you think Congress does a rotten job. You would let Ted Bundy babysit before you would allow Congress to trim your hedges.

But when Congress wants to spend a few jillion bucks on an anti-poverty program, or an education program, or a new machine to blow up A-rabs, the same surveys claim that you support these programs (based on party affiliation, of course).

It's easy to get worked up over the Carnahan family, simply because the quid isn't far enough removed from the proquo.
Very few people can look at that chart above and think we need 10,000 more teachers in our Gladiator Traning Institutes, but when Obama wants to hire more teachers we think it's a good idea. It would be rude to point out that these 10,000 teachers aren't going to start biting the hand that feeds them.

But take a look at who gets the rest of your the government's money. If The Pentagon needs to buy bullets, do they just purchase them from some random-assed bullet manufacturer? Absolutely not. They purchase them from a supporter, or someone who is about to be a supporter.

What about a jail? Are those built and constructed by generic contractors?

"In order to prevent democracy from becoming a tyranny over minorities, individual rights must supersede all democratic voting and all regulations. Rights must come first. Laws should come second, and only to protect those rights; nothing more." - Stuart K. Hayashi

The pic of the wolf in sheep's clothing came from here. It doesn't matter how nice the words Democracy, Majority Rule, or Nation Of Laws sound. If Democracy interferes with anyone's rights, it becomes Tyranny.

My friend John Jay Myers recently explained himself on The Libertarian Party Blog. (John Jay is running as a Libertarian for Congress against Pete "Bailout" Sessions in Texas 32nd district). Since no one who visits this site EVER hits a link, I've scraped the whole thing and put it in place below. This is the absolute best justification I've ever read for The Libertarian Party. I've put so much of John Jay's stuff here, I might as well give him a password:

Why Libertarian ?

I am asked, “Why don’t you run as a Republican? You could do so much good in the Republican Party.” I should not be upset. After all, it’s sort of a compliment - “They like me. They really like me!” It’s hard to respond because I don’t feel like knocking anyone's attempt at freedom or smaller government.

Some in the Libertarian Party might take exception to my comment “I believe in Principle before Party.” I do believe this, but let me say I also believe the Libertarian Party needs to flourish and become a true option for the American people. It would be silly for me to tell people that they should not always vote for party and then tell them that they should only vote for mine. However, I would like to take this time to explain the many reasons why I believe people should vote Libertarian and run as Libertarians.

But My Teacher Says...

I was forwarded a letter the other day from the Texas Secretary of State. It was an instructional tool for teachers to help them explain to students why we have a two-party system. It went on to say that “it helps preserve majority rule in a democratic state.” If you know me, you would understand why this completely gets under my skin. We don’t have a two-party system. If you look in the constitution, you will not find any mention of having parties whatsoever. I am quick to point out that the words majority rule, democratic, and democracy are also all not found in the constitution. Not once.

Democracy is the idea that people can vote themselves things. But the first question is where do things come from? That is where it should hit you. A direct democracy is theft. It is legal theft, but it is not much different than a gang with guns stealing from you. Because if you do not submit to the will of the majority, a man with a gun will soon come and take your stuff, and possibly put you in jail.

A simpler analogy is that democracy is simply two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for dinner, and you can bet that the answer will be lamb chops.

So we actually live in a republic. The difference is that individuals have rights, and the government has no power to take them away. This is why we have a constitution. So as Thomas Jefferson put it, “In questions of power, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution.”

I personally do not have any confidence in the man known as a politician, except that he is probably a "confidence man" (con-man for you kids out there). Which is why I ask the left and the right, “If we are all so sure the government is corrupt, why be so quick to give them more power?”

When we are taught that we only have two parties, they are robbing us of choice. What we really have is a majority opinion, and no one standing up for the opinion or rights of the minority. This smells a lot like lamb chops cooking to me.

Libertarians endorse many methods of ending the two party monopoly. Among them are Ranked or Approval Voting. Either is a step in the right direction from where we are now.

R’s and D’s are opposites?

Let’s play a game: which side supports the drug war, Iraq, Afghanistan, Patriot Act, and Gitmo? If you said Republicans, you would be right; if you said the Democrats, you would be right as well.

Which side supports socialized medicine, bailouts, stimulus, and debt? If you said the Democrats, you would be right; if you said the Republicans, you would be right as well.

Far from being opposites, neither will bring the troops home, restore fiscal responsibility, deal with entitlements, or promote free markets.

You may be starting to see why it is important that we have a strong Libertarian option. Libertarians would have a none-of-the-above approach on all of these issues.

Libertarians are the Party of Principle. The others are Principally Party.

America is ripe with crony capitalism, foreign intervention, debt and inflation, economic controls, and Ponzi schemes. Yet every election cycle we are led to believe that the major challenges facing us are “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” and mosques. Well ladies and gentlemen, I am here to tell you that we need to focus on the issues that unite us, and stop being divided by the idiocy of the election cycle. It is time to stand up and say, “Stop stealing my stuff!”

As long as we remain divided and so full of hate towards one side or the other, we will always fail to notice the two major parties slipping out the back with our wallets, our future, and our freedoms.

This is where the constitution comes in, and why we must return to it. Right now the Republicans and the Democrats are constantly giving deals to Big Insurance, Big Pharma, Big Energy, Big Oil, Big Banks, Big Auto, Big Agriculture, Big Education, Big Foreign Aid, Big Religion, and Big War. I ask you, by what right? By what right can they do this? It is not our government’s job to take our stuff and give it to the politically connected friends of politicians. Their only job is to protect our life, liberty, and property. This is a relatively simple job the current crop of leaders seems completely unable to handle.

If you turn in your constitution to Article 1 Section 8, you will find the 17 enumerated powers of government. Where do you see the power to give our money to any of those industries? It is not there. War is actually in there, but we don’t even have an officially declared war going on. We have strayed far from what our founders envisioned and more towards what Eisenhower warned us about, the corruption of the Military-Industrial Complex.

But we can change the Republicans...

No, you can’t. God bless ya for trying. We may be able to get a few reasonably good Republicans in there, and in my opinion Ron Paul is one of the greatest men in America. But, most of the liberty candidates were shot down, and even Rand Paul has had to fly very low on the radar, and either has intentionally toned down his message or is not as much like his father as I had hoped.

But my question is, where do you think all the hardcore neo-con nanny staters are going to go? They simply are not leaving the GOP. Those people believe we need to outlaw masturbation and have constant wars with half the world regardless of the cost or the lack of sense that it makes. Those people believe being fiscally conservative is not good enough - they have to tell people how to live their lives, and in some cases die.

They are not leaving the Republican Party, and their influence and power is growing. Christine O’donell didn’t win the primaries because she wants to end the wars and let people be free. She won because she is a social conservative who is willing to say, “We should stop spending money, and live within our means” - the meaningless mantra of every shell Republican who can’t figure out that Barack Obama’s health care plan did not double our debt during George Bush’s 8 years in office.

Do you believe these people are just going to disappear? It’s not going to happen. The Republicans will always find themselves bitterly divided, and that will not work when it comes to spreading liberty. It is a package deal. You can’t just take a little freedom.

Do you want to spend years of your life pounding your head against a brick wall only to find that half the bricks will never break?

The Power of Being Libertarian

This year I think we are going to see some very good poll numbers from Libertarians despite the fact that the media ignores us, and then they don’t allow us in the debates because they say we haven’t gotten enough media attention. If it wasn't so horrifying I would have to laugh. For some strange reason they say we don’t poll that well when we either aren’t included in the polls, or haven’t been mentioned in the media.

But, there is another reason why we should vote and run as Libertarians - because we are right. Our message is true, and we do not have to sacrifice some of our policies in order to appeal to a hard core wing of our party. We do not have to soft sell the message. The message is freedom, and when we start turning in numbers from 10-20%, we just may see that the Democrats and the Republicans, who are two sides to the same coin, just might start thinking a little more Libertarian. This to me would be a small victory on the way to major party status.

It is however very important that Libertarians stay true to the message of Less Government and More Freedom, and stand strong behind Social and Fiscal freedoms, which include religious freedom and tolerance, and ending the wars.

"But I am an Independent!"

No you are not; you are dependent. You are dependent on the two major parties to come up with a candidate that you are going to vote for. But as we have already shown, both sides are the same. Who is going to get the candidate who shares your belief on the ballot? Now is not the time to think, “The two parties got us into this mess and I am done with parties.” You would still only have those two. Now is the time to support a party that most represents you.

If those people only knew how hard it is to achieve and maintain ballot access for anyone but the two major parties, they would be more willing to help. Libertarians work very hard to get on the ballot especially considering we get no donations from major corporations because when elected they know we would not give them anything.

For those people who say they are independent I say, sorry, you are very dependent. If you don’t help a third party, any third party for that matter, you always will be.

John Jay Myers is Running for Congress against Pete Sessions in Texas’ 32nd District.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

From Talking Points Memo, where they are feigning confusion over why staffers are leaving the White House like rats leaving a sinking ship:

The word out tonight is that Rahm Emanuel is leaving the White House (to run for mayor of Chicago) and his departure will likely happen this week. I know people have strong feelings on both sides about Rahm. But I must say I find it somehow unseemly and almost bizarre what a rapid departure he's making.

Chief of Staff is usually considered a pinnacle job rather than a stepping stone. You do it until the president is done with you or you burn out, neither of which usually takes very long. And five weeks before an election? On very short notice? It just doesn't seem right.

--Josh Marshall

Mr. Marshall,

Rahm Emanuel has taken the suckers at the national level for all they've got. There is now substantial opposition at the national level to any more Porkulus, Stimulus, Clunkulus or Rahmulus.Prior to his "service" in the White House, Emanuel made $16 million dollars in just two years on Wall Street. After that, he helped set up the implosion of Freddie Mac. There is now substantial opposition to any more taxpayer gifts to Wall Street or Freddie Mac.

Mayor of Chicago is one of the few opportunities that remain open to a looter of Rahm Emanuel's talents. Despite sending more politicians/governors/mayors to jail than almost any other region, Illinois still has no serious opposition to grand scale theft. At least not until the plunder has been thoroughly distributed to all the underlings.

I hope this clears things up for you,

- Whited

P.S. - I'm setting the Over/Under for Rahm's first indictment at 6 years. Do you want the Over or the Under?

Monday, September 27, 2010

Here's a good rule of thumb for any government project, from NRO's Kevin Williamson. If someone absolutely refused to contribute to the project, would you be willing to lock him in a cage until he did so??

....The resort to violence is what makes the question of what kind of things it is legitimate for states to do an important moral concern. It seems to me perfectly reasonable to shove a gun in somebody’s face to stop him murdering, raping, or robbing. It seems to me entirely unreasonable to shove a gun in somebody’s face to extort from him money to fund a project to get monkeys high on cocaine. (Or to fund a project about African Genital Washing - TWS) Those seem to me fairly reasonable distinctions. It is illegitimate for government to use force or the threat of force for projects that are not inherently public in character.

The question of how much illegitimacy a state may perpetrate before becoming generally illegitimate itself is of real interest and has been, of late, the subject of some spirited discussion between some of my colleagues here and me. (You probably can guess on which side of the fault line I stand.)

But I would like to make it clear that I am not indulging in a figure of speech: I think it’s a pretty useful heuristic: If you’re not willing to have somebody hauled off at gunpoint over the project, then it’s probably not a legitimate concern of the state.

This is the sort of talk that gives (his Statist opponents) the howling fantods, inasmuch as they seem to operate under a kind of distributed version of the divine right of kings — always asking whether the rulers rule wisely, seldom asking whether they have the right to rule at all, and never asking whether and how much we actually need them.

So....would you be willing to throw someone in jail if he refused to help pay for The Lawrence Welk Museum? If not, then we probably don't need the government involved in the project.

Say your neighbor wants no part of paying for the Charles B. Rangel Center For Public Service, one of the most gloriously mis-named abortions since the Employee Free Choice Act. If your neighbor refused to pay one dime toward this memorial to a jackal, would you be willing to lock your neighbor in a cage until he changed his mind? If not, then perhaps the students of Charlie should pay for Charlie's school.

From now on, this concept will be called the "Neighbor In A Cage" test of government spending.

Ok, let's keep going. If Timmy The Tax Dodger Geithner wanted to back his getaway car up to The Treasury one more time for one more stimulus package, and the little old lady down the street thought it was a total ripoff, would you be willing to throw her in jail for not paying the taxes to support it? I think not.

Out of fairness, let's try this one. New England is invaded by Canada. The Canadians are headed southward. If your neighbor refuses to contribute to the defense of the U.S. in this situation, would you be willing to throw him in jail for not paying his taxes? I probably would. You might. Therefore, there's a possibility that defending the U.S. against a Canook invasion is a legit function of government.

....16 years after Nelson Mandela led the country to black majority rule, more than half of blacks ages 15 to 34 are without work — triple the level for whites.

....The sheriff arrived at the factory here to shut it down, part of a national enforcement drive against clothing manufacturers who violate the minimum wage. But women working on the factory floor — the supposed beneficiaries of the crackdown — clambered atop cutting tables and ironing boards to raise anguished cries against it.

Go here to read more about the racist origins of the U.S. minimum wage laws. The authors of this legislation wanted to guarantee full white employment at the expense of blacks. The issue was debated along those lines in Congress, and is one of the most successful pieces of legislation ever written, IF you look at it from the point of view of a Klansman. The cartoon above came from Carpe Diem, Professor Mark J. Perry's blog about economics and finance. This next cartoon is somewhat off-topic, but I think it illustrates the same mindset.

It's not about helping you. It's about how I feel while I pretend to help you.

Here are two quotes for your Sunday morning devotions, compliments of John Jay Myers' Facebook page:

“I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is ``needed'' before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents "interests,'' I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.” - Barry Goldwater

And from Guy Herbert's Facebook page:

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - CS Lewis